Jump to content

szabesz

Members
  • Posts

    2,867
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by szabesz

  1. Another and free option is this module https://processwire.com/modules/access-by-query-string/ from @Robin S It is not comparable to ProDrafts but might do what you need.
  2. This is what people call incredibly useful! Thanks for sharing, as always!
  3. If you are concerned with file size like that then you can use CDN (https://unpoly.com/install/cdn) conditionally: load local files when CDN is not available. Unpoly also have advanced caching, so by using that properly your site can behave more like an application then a website by providing (almost) instant responses. (As a related side-note, I also agree with this certain forum user on this forum: https://forum.bootstrapstudio.io/t/bootstrap-css-and-cleanup/10578/2?u=szabesz) As for my own experiences, I have not yet implement the conditional usage of CDN but the e-commerce site I developed using Unpoly for its frontend JS magic is loved by customers, partially because of the easy to use user interface I crafted for them, and partly because of the speed of the site, even though it loads full Bootstrap 5, full jQuery and also Unpoly (plus my CSS and JS, of course). Sure, browser and Unpoly caching helps a lot! About half of the users use their mobile phones to place orders and they are equally satisfied. I just cannot showcase the site because currently it is for contracted customers only. There are plans to open it up for the average retail customers as well (on a different domain) so when that is in production, I will probably provide this forum with my very first showcase. (In 1 or 2 years... as I have loads of other projects to finish before I can start working on that.)
  4. Yea these is how I think about it as well. HTMX is less opinionated and I like it that way. However HTMX is not the "JS sprinkles" (it's more for HTML over the wire requests) so that's where Alpine.JS comes in. While Unploly is definitely more opinionated for sure, that's also its strength and weakness at the same time. If someone starts using AlpineJs along with Unploly, then that person should use HTMX + AlpineJS instead in the first place. While Unploly is definitely more opinionated, it does not mean that based on Unploly is not possible to implement the same features that one would implement using HTMX + AlpineJS. You just need a completely different mindset when using either this or that. By using HTMX + AlpineJS one gets a sort of "lower level" solution while Unploly provides "higher level" tools. Using high level tools has the benefit of also dealing with documented conventions out of the box, while building upon a low level tool requires you to put more work in your documentation. High level tools has the drawback of sometimes having to find workarounds for different use cases, while low level tools introduces less of such issues. I don't want to persuade anyone to use Unpoly, but I want to mention that I use and love it, particularly because upgrading to major versions is always backward compatible. (Backward compatibility support extends to the previous major version.)
  5. If Unpoly was non existent I would sure use AlpineJS + HTMX these days. However, https://unpoly.com/ does exists and to me, having to use only one technology instead of two (or more) is very important. The fewer I have to deal with the better. More importantly, easy upgrade path is essential, so no wonder I am not willing to leave ProcessWire :)
  6. No access from Hungary or many other places form the globe either. US and Canada based VPN access works. I suspect that only North America is allowed.
  7. It is definitely not, I agree. I think even the introductory blog page does not make it clear what the purpose of DefaultPage actually is: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/pw-3.0.152/ And a lot more could be documented and supported, see my old thread, for example:
  8. Interesting but I find it hard to digest this chart as being a useful overview. I keep looking at it and fail to "keep anything of it in my brain". I find the following "cheat sheet" much more informative and therefore usable: https://addyosmani.com/blog/script-priorities/
  9. Yes, I refactored my code by using URL hooks which is much cleaner anyway. Maybe. I could dig up the old code to take a look at it but the issue is not important anymore. Thanks for you support!
  10. I should have checked first if there is new version of the module or not, I was banging on open doors... Thanks anyway, the new hookable method is very useful, and not just because I can now save custom data but because I can also skip logging saves performed by hooks only (by setting $event->return to null when a field is only changed by a hook and not by a person).
  11. Yet another pretty useful module from New Zealand. Thanks a million!
  12. That's strange as it does work for me. Did you double check everything?
  13. @teppo It's me again :) I wonder if you could somehow make it possible to optionally log more data in "$details" via hooking into the process, by more data I mean some filed values that has been changed. if (!empty($fields_edited)) $details['Fields edited'] = implode(", ", $fields_edited); https://github.com/teppokoivula/ProcessChangelog/blob/49c35bb65ae5642401df062168fa6f4a69dfbf75/ProcessChangelogHooks.module#L595 My use case is that such a feature could make it possible to do detailed debugging. If I could store some additional key data change, then I could reproduce what exactly happened, so that I can replicate the exact issue. Of course, I could just put logging all the data I need in my on code, but having your module do that instead would make an integrated solution.
  14. @franciccio-ITALIANO Can you please also wrap your code in the "Spolier" block as I requested? Very long posts make it pretty hard to see through a thread. The "Spolier" block hides its content in an accordion so that we can manually open it at will.
  15. Hello, You should paste in here the exact code of your _main.php, preferably hidden in a spoiler block of this editor (use both the "eye" and the "code" icons of the toolbar). That way we can have a better understanding of the issue and ask further questions.
  16. FORMATTED VERSION: in my config.php file $config->contentTypes = array_merge($config->contentTypes, array( 'css' => 'text/css' ) ); this adds the css file type in your template "files" tab / content-type select then, on top of my bibicss.php file <?php namespace ProcessWire; header("Content-type: text/css; charset: UTF-8"); header("Charset:utf-8"); and i linked to my bibicss page the usual way in the head of the pages that need it and it worked fine i think that would be the same for js files with a simple 'js' => 'text/javascript' and the correct headers Content-type in the template in case it helps have a nice day
  17. Hello, You can do this: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-core-updates-2.5.14/#multiple-copies-of-the-same-module Maybe I'm missing something, but how can one accidentally upgrade a module? Besides, if you think that is an issues, your backups and/or git versions, etc... should cover you, shouldn't they?
  18. related: https://codingpad.maryspad.com/2013/07/19/interview-with-ryan-cramer-processwire-cms-founder-and-lead-developer/
  19. Currently, the site I mostly work on is running ProcessWire 3.0.213 and PHP 8.0.x with 62 third party modules. I do not have a single issue which is worth mentioning, so I'd say this is certainly a "Peace-of-Mind Setup". Note that around ProcessWire 3.0.214 and ProcessWire 3.0.215 Ryan has started some heavy refactoring in the core so I would not call current dev versions "Peace-of-Mind" even thought he has fixed a lot of newly introduced bugs since then.
  20. Thanks for sharing! As always, your contribution to ProcessWire and its community rocks!
  21. In a perfect life, yes. But is it perfect? :) Jokes aside, as PHP development has been speeding up recently, I do not think it is realistic to expect Ryan and module developers to keep up with that pace. Luckily, I do not have such an experience but I would blame hosting companies for being so rigid. It is not they who have the burden to upgrade PHP websites to be able to run on PHP 8.1 or higher, so why do they force anyone to do that in the first place? I would also blame the PHP core team for not providing security fixes beyond one year: https://www.php.net/supported-versions.php While I agree that new features in PHP are welcome, I do not think they are so essential that I could not live without them for a few years more, if I wanted to. "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"
  22. I would not recommend setting ProcessWire's PHP requirements too high. Why would that help? If anyone wants to use PHP 8.1 or higher then that's fine but why should we "punish" those who cannot switch just yet? Why would "unifying" the required minimum PHP version help in any way? You cannot "force" module developers (who share their modules for free) do that. Am I missing the point, perhaps? BTW, I always use ProcessWire two versions behind the up to date major version of PHP because I do not want to deal with deprecated issues. I do not have time for that, and it saves me tons of time not to hurry just because...
  23. Hello guys, Read the forum rules please: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/8234-community-rules-guidelines/ I am thinking of this: "The forum language is English. We really appreciate the effort everyone makes from countries around the world to post in English. After careful consideration and experience on other forums, it makes sense to have one common language for discussion here so that ideas can be shared and not missed in language-specific forums - the same applies for debates that might get out of hand as we do not want to miss those either."
×
×
  • Create New...